‘The powerful ‘Enough is enough’ demonstration organised by the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council in March has effectively been ignored.’
Photograph: Wiktor Szymanowicz / Barcroft Images

I am a secular, immigrant Jew. I have never been active in the Jewish community; my two marriages were to non-Jews. I have visited Israel a number of times and have been a vocal critic of successive Israeli governments on many counts. But I am a Jew. My grandmother and my uncle were murdered by Hitler and many cousins and other relatives were slaughtered in the gas chambers. Indeed, my grandfather was one of six siblings; we are the only surviving line left and that was because my parents were in Egypt when the war broke out.

I joined the Labour party to fight racism. In the 1960s the Labour party was the natural home for Jews. To find myself 50 years later, in 2018, confronting antisemitism in my own party is completely and utterly awful. It is especially awful because, in the 2010 general election, I took on and thrashed Nick Griffin and the BNP in Barking.

How have we got here? Under Jeremy’s leadership, the Palestinian/Israeli conflict has been allowed to infect the party’s approach to growing antisemitism. It appears to have become a legitimate price that the leadership is willing to pay for pursuing the longstanding cause of Palestinians in the Middle East. Because of that, antisemitism has become a real problem in the Labour party. In the last year my colleagues and I have been subjected to a growing number of antisemitic attacks on Facebook, Twitter and in the post.

Complaints to the Labour party about antisemitism from party members have been dealt with in a desultory manner. The powerful “Enough is enough” demonstration organised by the Board of Deputies and the Jewish Leadership Council in March has effectively been ignored.

And on Tuesday, Labour’s national executive committee agreed its own definition of antisemitism. Instead of adopting the international definition agreed in 2016 in the wake of the rise of antisemitism across Europe, the party chose to omit key examples used in that definition and rewrote the definition to weaken and change it.

The party thought it knew better than the Crown Prosecution Service, the government, the devolved administrations and local authorities; it thought it knew better than 31 other countries, including Austria, France and Hungary, all of which have adopted the internationally agreed definition in full.

‘Confronting antisemitism in my own party is especially awful because, in the 2010 general election, I took on and thrashed Nick Griffin and the BNP in Barking.’ Photograph: Kieran Doherty/Reuters

It thought it could ignore the united voices within the Jewish community, the opinion of the chief rabbi, a powerful plea from 68 rabbis and the strong views of Labour Members of Parliament.

To give just one example of what the changes do, a Labour party member who calls Zionists “Nazis” could face expulsion, but may find themselves merely warned. This means that in 2018 a party member can call a Jew a Nazi and might not face the severest punishment.

The arrogance displayed by the Labour leadership takes one’s breath away. A definition of sexual harassment agreed without the explicit endorsement of women would be unconscionable. A definition of Islamophobia that was rejected by the Muslim community would never be entertained. Yet a definition that rolls over the sensibilities of Jews who are the victims of this racism is somehow OK.

Add to that the outrageous political bungling in the handling of the issue and perhaps some of you may understand my anger. The Labour party is so distrusted by the Jewish community, we are the last people on Earth, at this time, who should think about amending a widely accepted definition of antisemitism – a definition that already recognises our right to criticise the government of Israel.

Why did I protest against Corbyn? Look at his long list of evasions | Hadley Freeman

Read more

For the Labour party to have done this on the day when we were supposed to be united against the chaotic state of the government’s Brexit talks inevitably distracts attention – or maybe the Labour party was simply trying “to bury bad news”. There was a simple and straightforward alternative that Labour could have chosen. The party could have adopted the international definition in full and it could have launched an inclusive consultation, involving Palestinians and Jews to add to that definition if further clarification of the right to criticise the Israeli government was needed. Instead it chose to offend Jews. It chose to make the party a hostile environment for Jews. It chose to entrench antisemitism.

I chose to confront Jeremy directly and personally to express my anger and outrage. I stand by my action as well as my words.